Syrian opposition-Assad used chemical weapons. British expert-Impossible to prove from outside Syria

[pampango]

• The head of the Free Syrian Army, General Salim Idriss, claims to have proof that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons in Homs, Aleppo and outside Damascus. Speaking to CNN he said: “We took some samples of the soil and of blood. The injured people were observed by doctors and the samples were tested and it was very clear that the regime used chemical weapons."

• United Nations investigators will examine soil samples collected by western intelligence agencies and enter Syrian refugee camps in an effort to assess claims that the Assad regime has used sarin gas against its opponents. Proof of sarin use would increase pressure for intervention from the Obama administration which has long claimed the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would represent a "red line". Syria has prevented the UN investigation from being carried out inside the country, but Jeffrey Feltman, UN under-secretary for political affairs, made it clear on Wednesday that refusal would not prevent an inquiry from being carried out.

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, head of the counter chemical warfare company SecureBio and the former commanding officer of the army’s chemical weapons unit, said the US was right to cautious about Israeli, British and French claims that nerve agent have been used by the Syrian government.

In my professional opinion that sort of evidence [gathered outside Syria] would be very difficult for somebody to use as crossing the red line and a game changer. Very good background, but I don’t think it would be demonstrative enough to say this chemical weapons has been used here, by the regime or the opposition.

The difficulty is the chain of evidence ... The only true way this done can be done, is by the UN getting in on the ground. Is Assad going let the UN come and do it? I don’t see it at the moment?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2013/apr/25/syria-rebels-claim-proof-of-chemical-weapons-live

Sounds like any UN investigation done from outside of Syria won't really prove anything, but all sides will either embrace or discredit the results depending on whether they agree with them or not. Most seem to agree that it is good for Obama to be "cautious" about believing claims from the UK, France, Israel and the Syrian opposition that Assad has used chemical weapons. I hope that caution continues and the 'red line' is never crossed.

[TwilightGardener]

1. If you were going to use weapons of mass destruction to combat enemy forces, why

wouldn't you use them to KILL A LOT of your enemy forces? Why kill a few civilians here and there, and risk incurring the wrath of the rest of the world? It makes no sense. The US is right to doubt these chem weapon claims unless people start dying in droves and it's obvious.

[pampango]

2. I suppose the only argument against killing "A LOT" of enemy forces (aside from the moral one) is

the likelihood that you would leave unmistakeable evidence that you had crossed the "red line". I believe even Russia and China have said that they would abandon Assad if he did that.

I am sure that there could be a repressive regime in the midst of a civil war that might want to 'send a message' to the opposition on a small and deniable scale that "you already knew that we have these weapons. Guess what? We are not afraid to use them. We cannot use them on a large scale right now, because the world is watching, but the day may come when we feel less constrained or more desperate."

But just because I can envision such a scenario does not mean that it has actually happened or will happen. I agree that "The US is right to doubt these chem weapon claims..."